3 ms·
> Github
by abrichr 3y ago
> Github
- MichaelZuo 3y agoDo you understand what the parent is saying? It's clearly an analogy, not a literal recommendation for all academics to use Github.
- abrichr 3y agoI understand, thank you for clarifying :) My point was that academics could use Github (or something like it)
- MichaelZuo 3y agoCan you write out the argument for it, or why you believe it to be a net positive change compared to the current paradigm?
- abrichr 3y ago> Peer review is basically Github anonymous PRs that has the author pinky swear that the code compiles and 95% of test cases pass. It should be possible to use something like Github to *verify* "that the code compiles and 95% of test cases pass" instead of just "pinky swearing".
- MichaelZuo 3y agoBased on...?
- abrichr 3y agoTests and data.
- MichaelZuo 3y agoI meant what is your belief that it will be successful, or even workable, based on?
- abrichr 3y agoThe success of Github in creating software, and the success of software in advancing scientific progress. Maybe something like nbdev.fast.ai. In any case, it was just a thought, and likely not an original one. I would welcome it if someone tried to build this and proved it can’t be done. Thank you for the stimulating discussion!
- MichaelZuo 3y agoYes the characteristics of Github are understood. What is the actual line of argument that demonstrates this success/usefulness/etc... can be reproduced in your envisioned system? > I would welcome it if someone tried to build this and proved it can’t be done. It's impossible to prove a negative, so this doesn't make sense. Did you mistype?